S H 

■525 



2/ ,r\XtAoa aX(^>VlCLC JL\y^J/fj/\jjiC Go'Vt^./WV'Vja^^^t^ 



M W 




Glass 5 ^^ ^=6 



Book 



/c 



61sT Congress, ) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, i Document 

3d Session. \ \ No. 1375. 



INTERNATIONAL FISHERIES COMMISSION. 



MESSAGE 



PROM THE 



PRESIDENT OF THE UNHED STATES, 

TRANSMITTING 

A REPORT FROM THE AMERICAN MEMBER OF THE INTERNA- 
TIONAL FISHERIES COMMISSION. 



February 10, 1911. — Read, referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and 

ordered to be printed. 



To the Senate and House of Representatives: 

On the 2d of February, 1910, I submitted to Congress "A system of 
uniform and common international regulations for the protection 
and preservation of the food fishes in international boundary waters 
of the United States and Canada" in order that due legislative action 
on the part of the Government of the United States may be taken, 
as stipulated m article 3 of the convention of April 11, 1908, between 
the United States and Great Britain on the subject. The attention 
of Congress was again called to the subject in my annual message 
of December 6 last. 

I now transmit a report from the American member of the Inter- 
national Fisheries Commission, furnishing further information in 
explanation of the value of the regulations and as to certain modifi- 
cations which have been proposed and showing the importance of 
early action by Congress. He calls attention to the fact that the 
fisheries embraced in the regulations are among the most important 
in the world, and that they can be adequately protected only by the 
joint action of the two Governments. I can not too strongly urge 
upon Congress the importance of taking prompt action to put into 
operation the conservation measures provided in the regulations and 
to which this Government is pledged by treaty stipulation. 

Wm. H. Taft. 

The White House, February 10, 1911. 



5t^^^. 



2 international. fisheries commission, 

Department of vState, 

Washington, February 7, 1911. 
The President: 

I have the honor to transmit herewith a report from David Starr 
'Jordan, the American member of the International Fisheries Com- 
mission, furnishing further information as to the action of the commis- 
sion and explanations of the regulations which were transmitted by 
you to Congress with your special message of February 2, 1910. 
In my letter to you of January 31, 1910, accompanying the regula- 
tions, I made such explanations as I deemed requisite for a full 
understanding of this important subject. 

In transmittuig this report I do not consider it necessary to do 
more than to recommend that Congress be urged to take as prompt 
action on the subject as possible, for the reason that we are com-\ 
mitted to such action by treaty stipulation and that further delay is \ 
exposing this valuable industry to continued depletion. The report 
shows that certain modifications which the fishermen of the United 
States desire to have made in the regulations have been proposed to 
the commission with the view of having them adopted by the two 
Governments. 

Respectfully submitted. 

P. C. Knox. 



International Fisheries Commission, 

Stanford University, Gal., January 28, 1911. 

Dear Sir : I beg to present to you the following report on the work 
of the International Fisheries Commission: 

On April 11, 1908, a treaty or convention between Great Britain 
and the United States, concerning the fisheries in the boundary waters 
of the United States and Canada, was signed by Messrs. Elihu Root 
and James Bryce and approved by the President and the Senate of 
the United States. 

This treaty made provision for the unification of the fishery statutes 
of the United States and Canada, so far as these concern the boundary 
waters, and for propagation of food fishes and other measures for the 
enhancement of fishery interests in the region concerned. 

This work was placed in the hands of two commissioners, one from 
each nation. On July 1, 1908, Mr. Samuel T. Bastedo was appointed 
commissioner for Canada and David Starr Jordan commissioner for 
the United States. In December, 1908, Mr. Bastedo tendered his 
resignation, and Edward Ernest Prince, commissioner of fisheries for 
Canada, was appointed international fisheries commissioner in his 
place. 

The joint report of the two commissioners, involving 66 regulations 
for the protection of the fisheries in the treaty waters, was signed on 
May 29, 1909. 

This report involves conservation measures of the greatest iniport- 
ance because attainable in no other way. The fisheries of the Great 
Lakes and Puget Sound rank with the most important in the world. 
These waters are traversed by the international boundary. The 
fishes pass from side to side across this boundary. They can be 
protected only through joint action of the Governments concerned. 
Such| joint action in the machinery of nations js attainable only by 



^ INTERiirATIONAL, PISHEBIES COMMISSION". 3 

,^ treaty. In a treaty the nations, not the individual States or Prov- 
/*^ inces, must be the contracting parties. 

M-> In a series of regulations covering such a vast extent of territory 
z with varied products and varied interests it is unavoidable that the 
2 first draft should be incomplete. Many matters demand the test of 
^ experience, and some desired results can be reached in several different 
g ways. For these reasons the treaty contains the wise provision 
that the regulations may be amended at any time at the instance 
of the international fishery commissioners. 

While the commissioners hold themselves ready to examine every 
complaint and to make all necessary amendments, it is believed 
that at the present time but few such amendments are necessary, 
and those which have been agreed upon by the commission or pro- 
posed by me to my Canadian colleague are set forth elsewhere in 
this report. 

It is recommended that the regulations take effect on January 1, 
1912. It is necessary to give the fishermen one season to use their 
old nets, and the change should take place in midwinter, at which 
time there is no fisliing in treaty waters. - 

The followdng comments on the individual regulations may be 
found useful: 

General regulations: The general regulations 1 to 17 for the most 
part explain themselves and have not been subjects of criticism. 
No. 5, as to pollution of waters, is of special importance and is still 
frequently and grossly violated by establishments of various kinds 
near the treaty waters, but for the most part not actually situated 
on them. No. 10, prohibiting fishing under the ice, may require 
modification if found to work undue hardship in northern waters. 
No. 11, as to commercial fishing for game fishes, is of special impor- 
tance to the angler. No. 12, prohibiting the capture of immature 
sahnon, is especially important on the Pacific coast, as these young 
fish are often taken in nets and sold as "sea trout." It should be 
noted, however, that the humpback salmon is sometimes mature at 
3 pounds weight. No. 14, prohibiting the killing of sturgeon, offers 
the only possibihty of saving this most valuable fish, the five species 
of which are all very nearly exterminated in American waters. 

Passamaquoddy Bay: It may be noted that in referring to "the 
territorial waters of Passamaquoddy Bay" the treaty does not 
define the extent of the bay. There are other boundary waters 
adjacent to this bay, as Lubec Narrows and Menan Straits, which 
are not technically parts of Passamaquoddy Bay. It would be 
convenient if the application of the treaty could be extended so that 
the two counties, Charlotte, in New Brunswick, and \V^ashington, in 
Maine, were included under the same provisions. No. 13, protecting 
spawning grounds of herring, has no application if the treaty waters 
are Hmited rigidly to the bay in question. Such spawning grounds 
exist about Grand Menan Island. 

In No. 19 no attempt is made to settle the vexed question as to 
whether seines shall be used in the capture of young herring to be 
canned as ''sardines." This matter concerns the relative interest of 
different classes of fishermen, but it is n^t vital to the fisheries. We 
find no evidence that the herring in these treaty waters have suffered 
rom overfishing. In the last clause an attempt is made to prevent 
he waste of "smothering" when seines full of small fish are drawn 
o shore. 



4 INTEBISrATIONAXi FISHERIES COMMISSION. 

It is probable that No. 20 should go still further, prohibiting the 
killing of salmon by any other means than by hook and line. 

No. 21. This regulation had in view only the large purse nets, such 
as might be used for the capture of pollack and other fish of the open 
waters. It was not designed to prevent the substitution of small 
purse nets for seines in the emptying of weirs. In framing this regu- 
lation it was understood that the contents of a weir become private 
property, to be taken out as the owner pleases. 

Nos. 22 and 23, prohibiting the sale of short lobsters or of female 
lobsters, are both very important, as the lobster has suffered much 
from overfishing. In this and in many other cases the local statutes 
on one or both sides of the boundary have been made to coincide 
with the regulations of the commission. 

No. 25, defining the close season for lobsters, represents the best 
knowledge of the commission. It may be subject to amendment, 
should a different limit, on trial, be found preferable. 

Nos. 26, 27, and 28 concern the salmon in the St. Croix River. It will 
doubtless be found necessary to forbid the use of weirs and nets for 
the capture of salmon. As that part of the St. John River which is 
boundary water contains no food fish of importance except trout, no 
special regulations are necessary. The lower part of the St. John, 
passing through the middle of New Brunswick, is apparently not 
within the scope of this treaty. 

Lake Memphremagog is reserved for anglers only, the net fishing 
being unimportant. 

In Lake Champlain the yellow pike is the chief fish sought by an- 
glers. It is believed that this species receives adequate protection 
from the exclusion of nets from within 1 mile of the rivers in which 
it spawns, while at the same time the farmers about Missisquoi Bay 
are not wholly excluded from fishing. The Vermont State hatchery 
at Swanton is also a large factor in the preservation of the yellow 
pike. In Lake Champlain, as about Lake Memphremagog and about 
the Thousand Islands, the interests of the summer angler are of far 
greater financial importance to the resident people than market 
fisheries could be. Since these regulations have been made public 
no serious complaint has arisen from any part of Lake Champlain, 
which for a long time has been a special center of friction. It is 
believed that these regulations are just to all interests concerned. 

Of the Great Lakes, Lake Erie is by far the most important so far 
as fishery interests are concerned. Its waters* are shallow, and 
therefore stocked with fish food, which is not the case in the deeper 
waters of the upper lakes. Moreover, in Lake Erie the operations 
of the fish hatcheries have been most conspicuously successful. 
The number of whitefish, the most important species, placed in Lake 
Erie each year by the hatcheries of the United States, of Ohio, and 
of Pennsylvania, approaches a billion a year. The United States 
may properly be charged with grossly overfishing this lake. At the 
same time it must receive credit for the hatchery work done, which 
has restored the fisheries to their former extent. 

In Appendix A are given statistics in regard to the output of 
hatcheries. 

Thus far the hatcheries of Canada and the hatcheries on lakes 
other than Lake Erie have been quite inadequate. Provision has 
now been made in Canada for extension of the hatcheries, and for 



INTERITATIOISrAL FISHERIES COMMISSION. 5 

some time the hatcheries of Ohio and of the United States at Put in 
Bay have received eggs from Canadian fishermen. 

The present writer beheves that hatchery measures are more impor- 
tant than measures of restriction. The whitefish, yellow pike, lake 
trout, and lake herring are the fishes of the Great Lakes which yield 
the best returns from artificial hatching. 

Nos. 34 to 36, prescribing minimum weights for market fish, are 
matters of high importance and the limits here given are generally 
approved by competent fishermen. Every fisherman at times takes 
immature fish whether he will or not. In the case of the whitefish 
and other very sensitive species, it is not possible to return these to 
the water alive, and the fisherman is forbidden to throw them over- 
board. The regulations contemplate that he shall not sell these fish 
and that dealers shall not buy them. The fisherman has the option 
to use them himself or to give them away in charity. 

There is a strong feeling among fishermen that ' ' a legal net should 
make legal fish " ; that is, that whatever is taken in a net set according 
to law should be allowed to go into the market. On the other hand, 
there is also a feehng that only the boats and markets need be in- 
spected, and that the fishermen should use any form of net they like 
and any mesh, provided that the catch is not below legal size. In 
the long run, perhaps, this view of the case may be adopted, but the 
experience of wardens forces us to believe that, for the present, the 
mesh of the net and the size of the fish should both be guarded. 

Regulation 44, forbidding nets in rivers, is generally approved, 
except by those fishermen who violate it. 

In No. 46 it is provided that in those waters where pound nets are 
set mainly for whitefish, they should have a mesh of not less than 
3 J inches. 

The rest of this regulation is based on the Ohio statute, modified 
slightly at the advice of the Ohio State Fish Commission. Whether 
the mesh indicated, 2f inches, is best, and whether half the back of 
the crib need be of this size, are matters to be studied. Fishermen 
claim that 2h inches mesh in one-third the back of the crib is adequate; 
and, in deference to their wishes that the size of the mesh be reduced 
one-fourth of an inch, I have deemed it best to suggest to my col- 
league that, pending further study on this point, the regulation be 
amended by reducing the size of mesh from 2f to 2^ inches. 

It is believed that the rule requiring "fishing measure" is the only 
one wardens can enforce. Pound-net mesh shrinks much on tarring, 
and to allow '^ factory measure," as desired by many fishermen, is 
to leave the regulations almost insusceptible of enforcement. It is 
claimed that factories will often bill a net as of any size desired. 

Owing to an oversight on the part of the commissioners, an amend- 
ment to regulation 46 is necessary with reference to the herring 
fisheries (Georgian Bay herring) of Lake Huron. When this regulation 
was agreed upon the commissioners did not know that in certain 
parts of Lake Huron the lake herring of a very small species were 
taken only in pound nets, and they adopted for the mesh of pound 
nets a size fitted only for larger fish. My colleague has already 
agreed with me that this regulation should be changed so as to leave 
for the present the waters in question to the operation of the existing 
statutes of Canada and Michigan by inserting in it, after the first 
paragraph, the following clause: 



© INTEBNATIONAli^riSHEBIES COMMISSION. 

This regulation shall not apply in the waters of Lake Huron south of a line running 
due west from the shore of Pleasant Bay, Province of Ontario, and terminating at 
Thunder Bay Lighthouse, on Thunder Bay Island, and about two and a half statute 
miles north of the forty-fifth parallel of north latitude.^ 

In No. 49 the lake herring about Hamilton Beach are of a smaller 
species, hence the commissioners have agreed to amend regulation 
No. 49 by inserting at the end of the second paragraph a provision 
that it "shall not apply in the waters of Lake Ontario adjacent to 
the shore of Halton and Peel Counties, Province of Ontario/' where 
a small variety of herring occurs as is claimed in the waters of Lake 
Huron above referred to. 

No. 48. The concealed movable trap net, known as "submarine 
net," was invented on Oneida Lake for poaching purposes. It was 
brought to Lake Erie to capture black bass and to Lake Huron to 
capture yellow pike and other species. Its use is very objectionable 
as it is subject to no regulation. 

From it has arisen the large trap net or top and bottom net used 
in the western part of Lake Erie, but mostly forbidden elsewhere. 
This is much like a pound net, but its crib is covered. Hence in 
storms its catch is destroyed and drowned. The limp mesh enables 
it to hold smaller fish than the pound net. On the other hand, the 
much lower cost enables fishermen with little capital to maintain 
themselves. The top and bottom net costs perhaps SI 00, the 
pound net $300 or more. For gill-net fishing, at present, a steam 
tug is necessary. 

It is a question for later determination whether any form of trap 
net or net with closed crib can safely be allowed. The commis- 
sioners are not at present prepared to define the terms on Ayhich 
any such net may be used; but, in view of the fact that these regula- 
tions will not, if enacted, go into effect for another year, during which 
time the commission will probably agree upon some terms of regula- 
tion, I have, upon further consideration, proposed to amend regula- 
tion 48 so as to allow the use of trap nets under proper regulation. 

No. 47. The last clause of this regulation is intended to legalize 
the locations of pound nets as specifically allowed by the State of 
Michigan. 

No. 49: The mesh here allowed for gill nets, 3 J inches, for Lake 
Erie seemed to us the smallest which would adequately protect the 
fish of that lake, but in deference to the wishes of local fishing inter- 
ests I have proposed an amendment reducing the size of the mesh to 
3 inches. It is claimed by some that a smaller mesh than 2| inches 
is desired in the west end of Lake Superior for lake herring, and as 
above noted it will be provisionally allowed in the west end of Lake 
Ontario. 

It may be noted that our regulations have not provided for the 
protection of the blue fin, cisco, longjaw, and other deep-water alhes 
of the lake herring. This is pending investigation of their habits. 
Meanwhile the statute of Michigan, to which State these species are 
chiefiy limited, has given these species adequate protection. 

It is recognized that overfishing has been the rule throughout the 
Great Lake system, checked in Lake Erie only by the work of the 
hatcheries. The limitations in regulation 47 are intended somewhat 
to reduce the number of pound nets, and those in regulation 50 to 
limit the amount of gill netting. 



INTERNATIONAL FISHERIES COMMISSION. 7 

Each form of net is destructive in proportion to the number of fish 
it takes, especially if immature fish be included. In general, the gill 
net is more wasteful than the pound net, because all fish taken die. 
If the net is left too long in the water, the fish spoil. This often 
happens in summer. 

In the spawning season the eggs and milt of the fish taken in pound 
nets can always be saved for hatchery purposes. In most of the gill- 
net catches the eggs and the milt are lost. In wintertime gill nets 
are often torn from their moorings by storms and drift about entan- 
gling fishes until they sink. In one storm in Lake Erie in 1909 
upward of 150 miles of gill nets were thus afloat, doing great mischief 
to the fisheries. 

For the reason of the warmth of the water in Lake Erie and Lake • 
Ontario it has been thought best (in regulation 50) to restrict the 
amount of netting used by a single boat. Some operators at Erie 
and Cleveland now much exceed the amount considered reasonable. 
These limits should be subject to further investigation, pending which 
I have, at the instance of the fishermen of Lake Erie, laid before the 
commission an amendment which will permit the use in the waters of 
that lake of 60,000 yards of netting during the months of March and 
April. ' 

The commission has not recommended any close season for the 
Great Ijakes for the reason that local conditions vary so much that 
sweeping rules are impossible. Canada has close seasons varying 
with different counties. Most of the States bordering on the lakes 
have also close seasons. In general pound nets can not be used in 
December, January, February, or March, owing to storms, nor in July 
and August in the lower lakes, owing to vegetation in warm water 
rotting the twine. Gill nets should not be used in midwinter because 
of the danger of losing them as derelicts, nor in the lower lakes in 
midsummer because the fish soon decay. 

In regions where hatcheries exist, October and November, the 
spawning season for whitefish, lake herring, and trout, are desirable 
months for fishing, each vessel being required to save the eggs and 
milt. Where there are no hatcheries, it is best to proliibit fishing 
after October 15. 

In view of all this, it will be readily seen that these regulations as a 
whole are not arbitrary nor severe, but rather that they represent a 
minimum of the preservation necessary for the conservation of these 
most valuable fisheries, the joint property of Canada and the United 
States. 

Regulation 51 mentions the fyke net as available for coarse fish. 
In western part of Lake Erie a peculiar net known locally as fyke net 
is used in the river mouths for coarse fish. This so-called fyke net, 
unlike the fyke net mentioned in the regulations, is a sort of pound 
net, in which the crib is held in a frame of iron rectangles. This net 
would be included in the definition of a trap net given in the regula- 
tions. As, however, it can not be used in the open lake, as storms 
would tear it loose, but only in the mouths of rivers, it does not appear 
that these regulations apply to it. 

In the same region a peculiar net called trammel net is also used, 
a net apparently objectionable, as young fish become entangled in 
it. This is not mentioned in the regulations, as its use is unim- 
portant. 



8 INTEBNATIONAJj FISHERIES COMMISSION. 

Regulation 52 : No nets of any kind, those for carp excepted, are 
now used in Lake St. Clair, and it is desirable to hold the St. Clair 
Flats for black bass anglers. 

Regulation 45, establishing a neutral zone along the middle of 
Lake Erie, is intended to prevent the encroachment of fishing vessels 
into the waters of the other nation. Such encroachment subjects 
vessels to seizure. 

The communications given in Appendix B are typical of the atti- 
tude of those favoring the conservation of the fisheries. (See Appen- 
dix B.) 

In Lake of the Woods (53 to 65) it will be desirable to make still 
further limitations, increasing the size limit of yellow pike, reducing 
the number of pound nets, and closing the Grand Traverse, or main 
open part of the lake, to gill-net fishing. 

The Straits of Fuca and adjacent waters offer the most difficult 
problems, while at the same time the values of the fisheries involved 
render conservation and restriction a delicate task. 

The chief species involved is the red salmon or sockeye salmon. 
This fish spawns in the shallows at the heads of mountain lakes. It 
mostly spends its first year in the lakes, then passes down to the open 
sea, where its movements are almost unknown. At the age of 4 years 
it runs. In early August it enters the Straits of Fuca, thence it passes 
up to the mouth of the Fraser River, the majority through Rosario 
Straits, perhaps a fourth through Haro Straits. It uses a week or 
two for the passage from Cape Flattery to the Fraser River and a 
month or more to rise to the spawning grounds. When they enter 
the straits, these salmon are in prime condition. They do not feed 
while running, and before they spawn their flesh and their appearance 
have undergone great changes, and after the 1st of September they 
are not fit for food. After spawning, in November, all die, male and 
female, without exception. 

The number running each year is conditioned on the number which 
reached the spawning beds four years before. They run, therefore, in 
independent cycles. In 1901, 1905 and 1909 the number running was 
enormous. There will without doubt be a great run in 1913. The 
run of 1910 was less than one half that of 1909, but as apparently more 
spawned in 1906 than in 1908, the run of 1910 will be larger than that 
of 1912, that of 1907 (1911) being apparently intermediate. 

All of these fishes (excepting a small run which passes up the Skagit 
River) are spawned in Canadian waters, at the head of the multitude 
of lakes drained by the Fraser River. Most of them pass to the sea 
through United States waters (Rosario Straits, etc.) and again they 
return through the same waters to the spawning beds of the lakes. 
All hatchery operations must be conducted on Canadian soil, and no 
eggs can be secured for hatching except from Canada. 

On the other hand, more than half the fish caught for canning pur- 
poses are taken in waters under United States jurisdiction. 

On every available spot in and about Rosario Straits and along the 
mainland to Point Roberts, pound nets are estabUshed. In the same 
way the Canadian waters, the lower Fraser River, and the waters off 
its mouth are filled with a thicket of gill nets. 

Besides these the open waters of the Straits of Fuca are now beset 
with great purse seines, which exceed in effectiveness, especially in 
seasons of the great runs, both gill nets and pound nets. (It is prob- 
able that some regulation of the use of these nets should be adopted.) 



INTERNATIONAL FISHERIES COMMISSION. 9 

The publication of the regulations in 1909 has given the fishermen 
interested opportunity to consider the practical effect of their opera- 
tion. As the result of suggestions which have come from the v^ ash- 
ington fishermen, I have laid before the commission, and they are now 
under consideration by it, the following amendments to regulations 
62, 63, and 64: 

No. 62 : To be amended by adding a provision that it shall not apply 
to humpback salmon. 

No. 63 : To be amended by making the weekly close season conform 
to the laws of the State of Washington, which provide for a close sea- 
son from 4 p. m. Friday to 4 a. m. Sunday. It is feared that if the 
regulation be adopted in its present form it will have the effect of 
extending the close season from 4 p. m. Friday, provided by the Wash- 
ington statute, to 6 a. m. Monday, provided by the regulation, making 
in all 62 hours. 

No. 64: This regulation is highly important in its relation to regu- 
lation 63, although thus far most difficult to enforce, and the prohi- 
bition of the jigger was intended to supplement its other provisions. 
The ^'jigger" is a device to keep the fish from passing around the net 
in the close season. The fishermen claim, however, that the provi- 
sions of this regulation requiring nets to be so constructed as not to 
take fish during the weekly close season covers every reasonable 
requirement, and I have, therefore, proposed that, pending further 
inquiry, the regulation be so amended as to permit the use of jiggers, 
or at least of jiggers in which an opening is maintained. 

In the last clause of regulation 65, before '' 4 inches," the words " not 
less than" were omitted by a clerical error. It is, however, evident 
from the text that 4 inches is meant simply as a minimum, not as an 
exact definition of the size of the mesh. 

It is believed that the restrictions in regulations 62, 63, 64, 65, and 
66 bear fairly evenly on all classes of fishermen, that they will tend 
to reduce the salmon catch to the extent of filling the spawning beds, 
and thus provide that every year, not one year in four as now, shall 
yield a normal harvest of salmpn. 

In Appendix C is a record of the catch of Fraser River salmon for 
10 years. 

In Appendix D is given a record of the personnel now engaged on 
the part of the United States in the enforcement of the fishery statutes 
in international waters. 

David Starr Jordan, 
International Commissioner of Fisheries for the United States. 

Hon. Philander C. Knox, 

Secretary of State, 



10 



INTERNATIONAL FISHERIES COMMISSION. 



Appendix A. 

I. Statement of Commercial Fishes Planted in the Great Lakes by State 

Commissions. 



PENNSYLVANIA. 



Fry of yellow pike, blue pike, whitefish, and lake herring have been planted in 
Lake Erie by the State of Pennsylvania as follows: 



Yellow pike: 

1899 24,040,000 

1900 23,210,000 

1901 25,750,000 

1902 43,720,000 

1903 23,340,000 

1904 27,740,000 

1905 51,200,000 

1906 53,700,000 

1907 107, 773, 250 

1908 104, 062, 500 

Blue pike: 

1899 1, 800, 000 

1900 7,800,000 

1901 12, 800, 000 

1902 5,000,000 

1903 20,500,000 

1904 2,000,000 

1905 9,450,000 

1908 105, 000, 000 



Whitefish: 

1900 32,000,000 

1901 19,240,000 

1902 44,560,000 

1903 19,826,000 

1904 '39, 200, 000 

1905 34,489,000 

1906 36,458,000 

1907 39,446,500 

1908 54,114,000 

Lake herring: 

1901 38, 600, 000 

1902 10, 800, 000 

1903 1,840,000 

1904 • 5,600,000 

1905 22, 840, 000 

1906 39, 120, 000 

1907 7, 000, 000 

1908 18, 892, 000 



The following plants of whitefish, lake herring, tvall-eyed pike, and pickerel fry 
were made in Lake Erie by the State of Ohio in 1901 to 1907: 



1901 50, 000, 000 

1902 40, 000, 000 

1904 30, 000, 000 



1905 35, 000, 000 

1906 25, 000, 000 

1907 100, 000, 000 



Present capacity of Put-in Bay hatchery, 428,544,000 herring fry. 

MICHIGAN, 

Whitefish, lake trout, and wall-eyed pike planted in Lakes Michigan and Superior 
in 1901 to 1908: 





"WMteflsh. 


Lake trout. 


Wall-eyed pike. 


1901 


35,450,000 
66,820,000 
37,500,000 
20,375,000 
15,278,000 
53,780,000 
27,025,000 
12,210,000 


19,980,000 
17,877,000 
16,168,000 
20,462,000 
18,803,000 
16, 107, 000 
19,724,000 
12,345,000 


78, 200, 000 


1902 


37, 325, 000 


1903 


46, 170, 000 


1904 . . 


37,825,000 
76, 800, 000 


1905 


1906 , 


79,140,000 


1907 


44,900,000 
112, 075, 000 


1908 





internationaij fisheries commission. 



11 



II. Statement op Fish Culture Operations Conducted by the United States 
Bureau op Fisheries por the Benepit op the Great Lakes. Furnished by 
the United States Bureau op Fishjejries January 2, 1911. 



Output of fish and eggs and cost of operating. 
CAPE VINCENT (N. Y.) STATION. 



Fiscal 
year. 


Species. 


Eggs. 


Fry. 


Fingerlings, 
yearlings, 
and adults. 


Cost of 
operating. 


1901 


Brook trout . . 




274,200 

1,485,000 

13, 552, 000 

37,550,000 

20,000 

749, 350 

38,360 

3,088,880 

34,300,000 

30,575,000 

377,000 

6, 443, 170 

4,400 

25,500,000 

4,650,000 

1, 198, 600 

42,000 

4, 470, 000 

9,200 

14,800,000 

100,000 

775, 540 

24,700 

4,876,000 

4,800 

21,000,000 

6,500,000 

545,000 

4,875,000 

23, 700, 000 

8,000,000 

971, 990 

4,234,500 

29,000,000 

15,700,000 

44,200,000 

9,900,000 

600,000 

4, 352, 120 

766,000 

19,550 

28,500 

19, 870, 000 

15,700,000 

500,000 

4,500 

899,000 

3,190,000 

46,761 

20,170,000 

941,500 

4, 852, 000 

4, 800, 000 

14,500 

38,000 

1,600,000 


















Whiteflsh 






. 111,179.67 




Pike perch 


4,000,000 












1902 












Rainbow trout 










Steelhead trout 




1,319 


. 9, 788. 64 












Pike perch 








1903 






















Land-locked salmon 






J. 7, 864. 51 




Wliiteflsh 


















1904.. . . 


Brook trout. 










Rainbo'rt^ trout 




















Land-locked salmon 






8, 274. 31 




■Whiteflsh 
















' 


1905 












Steelhead trout ... 




















Land-loclced salmon '. 






9, 533. 54 




Whiteflsh . . 










Pike perch 








1906 






















Whiteflsh 






I 8,013.48 












1907 












Lake trout. . 










Whiteflsh 


















1908 


Whiteflsh . 










Pike perch 




















Lake trout 






9, 144. 50 




Brook trout 




141,000 














Laad-locked salmon 








1909 


Whiteflsh ... 










Pike perch 




















Rainbow trout. . . 






9,306.01 




Brook trout 


















1910 


Steelhead trout 










Whiteflsh 










Brook trout 




















Pike perch . . . . 






\ 8, 344. 05 




Land-locked salmon 




















Yellow perch 



















PUT IN BAY (OHIO) STATION. 



Whiteflsh 

Lake herring. 
Pike perch . . . 

Whiteflsh 

Pike perch... 

Whiteflsh 

Lake herring . 
Pike perch . . . 
Lake trout . . . 



10,554,000 
30,820,000 
42,100,000 
56,260,000 
60,000,000 
38,052,000 



70,000,000 



125,100,000 

20,200,000 

156,587,000 

200,500,000 

143,000,000 

71,125,000 

1,500,000 

105,325,000 

491,600 



$13,363. 99 
15,529. 83 



12,633.07 



1 Transferred to other stations of the bureau, 30,000,000 pike perch eggs. 



12 



INTEBNATIONAJj FISHEEIES COMMISSION, 



II. Statement of Fish Culture Operations Conducted by the United States 
Bureau op Fisheries for the Benefit op the Great Lakes. Furnished by 
THE United States Bureau of Fisheries January 2, 1911 — Continued. 

Output offish and eggs and cost of operating— Continned. 
PUT IN BAY (OHIO) STATION— Continued. 



Fiscal 
year. 


Species. 


Eggs. 


Fry. 


Fingerlings, 
yearlings, 
and adults. 


Cost of 
operating. 


19041 


Whitefish 


46,280,000 


53,250,000 
23,300,000 
139,275,000 
884,000 
120,300,000 
35,000,000 
153,700,000 
913,000 
140,000,000 


















82,000,000 




I $10,798. 15 




Lake trout 






1905 2 


Whitefish 


59,953,000 
87,040,000 
88,350,000 








Lake herring 






















1906 3 


Whitefish 


49,529,000 
38,300,000 
99,600,000 












. 9,942.79 




Pike perch 


135,400,000 

600,000 

87,500,000 

50,000,000 

229,000,000 

900,000 

190,000,000 

3,200,000 

897, 500 












1907 4 


Whitefish 


57,249,000 

9,040,000 

204,150,000 








Lake herring 
















Lake trout .... 






19086 


Whitefish 


107,766,000 
12,790,000 
















Lake trout. .. 




> 13,526.35 






169,725,000 
141,120,000 
407,850,000 


80,000,000 
139,000,000 
79,750,000 
343,000 
10,000,000 
89,375,000 
75,020,000 
70,300,000 






19096 


Whitefish 








Pike perch 








Lake trout 
















1910'... . 


Pike perch 


324, 475, 666 

77,008,000 

1,440,000 








Whitefish 




I 11,395.31 



















NORTHVILLE (MICH.) STATION. 
[Including substations.] 



19018 


Brook trout 




991,250 

125,050,000 

5, 610, 000 

50,000 

72,000 

217,500,000 

11,255,000 

1,031,000 

75, 000 

86,000 

140, 000 

200,000 

1.32, 250, 000 

14, 985, 000 

971,000 

80,000 

25,000 

3,000 

2,000,000 

98,000,000 

5,750,000 

830,000 

138,000 

60,000 

9,500 








Whitefish 


36, 145, 000 

4, 500, 000 

10,000 








Lake trout 


153, 000 


l$16, 767. 76 




Loch Leven trout 






Rainbow trout 






19029 


Wliitefish 


55, 000, 000 
3,535,000 








Lake trout 








Brook trout 








Lock Leven trout 






20, 083. 53 




Rainbow trout 










Steelhead trout 










GrayUng 








1903".... 


Whitefish 


25,275,000 
5,850,000 








Lake trout 








Brook trout 








Lock Leven trout 






• 20,521.53 




Steelhead trout 










Land-locked salmon . . 


















1904".... 


Whitefish 


14,035,000 
3,010,000 








Lake trout 








Brook trout 


15,000 
42 
28,000 
49,040 
15,000 






Lock Leven trout . . 




\ 19,768.87 




Rainbow trout 








Steelhead trout 








Small-mouth black bass 








Pike perch 


22,495,000 


2, 300, 000 





1 Transferred to other stations of the bureau, 23,000,000 pike perch eggs. 

^ Transferred to other stations of the bureau, 30,920,000 whitefish eggs and 10,000,000 pike perch eggs. 

s Transferred to other stations of the bureau, 25,407,000 whitefish eggs and 7,000,000 pike perch eggs. 

■1 Transferred to other stations of the bureau, 65,250,000 pike perch eggs. 

6 Transferred to other stations of the bureau, 20,000,000 whitefish eggs and 52,000,000 pike-perch eggs. 

6 Transferred to other stations of the bureau, 50,576,000 whitefish eggs and 37,600,000 pike-perch eggs. 

' Transferred to other stations of the bureau, 37,300,000 pike-perch eggs and 25,640,000 whitefish eggs. 

8 16,300,000 whitefish eggs and 3,767,000 lake trout eggs transferred to other stations of the bureau. 

9 3,072,000 lake trout eggs and 49,400,000 whitefish eggs transferred to other stations of the bureau. 
1" 1,500,000 lake trout eggs and 68,000,000 whitefish eggs transferred to other stations of the bureau. 
*i 1,005,000 lake trout eggs and 25,980,000 whitefish eggs transferred to other stations of the bureau. 



INTERNATIONAL FISHERIES COMMISSION. 



13 



II. Statement of Fish Culture Operations Conducted by the United States 
Bureau op Fisheries for the Benefit op the Great Lakes. Furnished by 
the United States Bureau op Fisheries January 2, 1911— Continued. 

Output offish and eggs and cost of operating — Continued. 

NORTHVILLE (MICH.) STATION— Continued. 



Fiscal 
year. 


Species. 


Eggs. 


Fry. 


Fingerlings, 
yearlings, 
and adults. 


Cost of 
operating. 


1905 1 


Whitefish 


1,010,000 
4,546,000 


101,000,000 

21,834,000 

795,000 








Lake trout 


650 

131,560 

12 

1,315 

32 

102, 150 












Loch Leven trout 












48,000 
16,000 


1 S21,196.38 






















57,400,000 
23,570,000 
25,010,000 


21,000,000 

79,000,000 

15,500,000 

492, 991 

22, 525 

29,000 

42,000 

6,000 

25,600,000 

90,900,000 

15,656,000 

568,000 




1906 2 


Whitefish ... 


















21,000 




















> 20,451.41 




Steelhead trout 














36,900 








34,500,000 
32,650,000 
23,520,000 




1907 3.. 


Whitefish 


















2.500 
13,000 
22,931 






Rainbow trout 




21,413.62 
















50,666,666 

31,500,000 
2,289,000 


23,500,000 

130,000,000 

14,241,600 

21,000 

505,000 




1908 * 


Whitefish 


























50, 000 


147,000 

12 

44,825 


\ 21 077.41 










Small-mouth hlacis bass 




2,000 
39,300,000 
15,197,500 
98,000,000 
45,350,000 
366,000 
21,000 








48,000,000 

22,756,000 

1,100,000 

50,000,000 




1909 « 




30,000 






Whitefish 






Pike perch 








Brook trout 


113,313 


22,638.16 




Steelhead trout. 








Small-mouthed black bass 




39,790 




1910 « 


Whitefish 


4,000,000 
34,280,000 
10,010,000 


75,000,000 
12,100,000 
19,584,000 

426,000 
500 

162,000 






Pike perch ... 










3,500 

106,200 

82,000 

14,000 






Brook trout 


20,657.81 




Rainbow trout 








Small-mouthed black bass 















DULUTH (MINN.) STATION. 



1901 ' . . . 


Brook trout 




46, 855 

39, 900 

5,595,000 

14,600,000 

92,230 

32, 000 

96, 900 

7,150,000 

199, 000 

29,800,000 

98,000 

2,000 

49,313 

6,880,000 

17,000,000 

3,900,000 








Rainbow trout 












1,400,000 




[ §7,896.62 




Whitefish 






19028 


Brook trout . 










Rainbo v trout. 










Steelhead trout 




30,000 






Lake trout 


1,700,000 


8, 355. 75 




Grayling 








Whitefish 








1903 9 


Brook trout 










Rainbov trout. . . 










Steelhead trout 










Lake trout 


2,435,896 




8, 063. 34 




A\Tii teflsh 








Pike perch 









1 7,430,000 lake trout eggs and 25,500,000 whitefish eggs and 5,000,000 pike perch eggs transferred to other 
stations of the bureau. 

s 8,124,000 lake trout eggs and 25,500,000 whitefish eggs transferred to other stations of the bureau. 

3 9,898,000 lake trout eggs and 14,500,000 pike perch eggs and 51,500,000 whitefish eggs transferred to other 
stations of the bureau. 

* 47,500,000 whitefish eggs, 16,000,000 pike perch eggs, and 2,650,000 lake trout eggs transferred to other 
stations of the bureau. 

s 14,110,000 lake-trout eggs, 60,000,000 whitefish eggs, and 32,800,000 pike-perch eggs transferred to other 
stations of the bureau. 

'5,300,000 lake-trout eggs and 20,500,000 whitefish eggs transferred to other stations of the bureau. 

' 700,000 lake trout eggs transferred to other stations of the bureau. 

*6,121,000 lake trout eggs transferred to other stations of the bureau. 

69 386,320 lake trout eggs transferred to other stations of the bureau. 



14 



INTEBNATIONAL FISHERIES COMMISSION. 



II. Statement of Fish Culture Operations Conducted by the United States 
Bureau op Fisheries for the Benefit of the Great Lakes. Furnished by 
THE United States Bureau of Fisheries January 2, 1911 — Continued. 

Output offish and eggs and cost of operating — Continued. 

DULUTH (MINN.) STATION— Continued. 



Fiscal 
year. 


Species. 


Eggs. 


Fry. 


Fingerlings, 

yearlings, 

and adults. 


Cost of 
operating. 


1904 1 


Brook trout 




17, 000 
13,400 








Rainbow trout 














48,000 
10,000 








50,000 


7,155,000 

10,000,000 

3,850,000 

4,903 

117,000 

45,000 

8,139,000 

25,860,000 

4,100,000 

142,000 

81,200 

7,913,000 

21,055,000 

3,025,000 

60,000 

8,000 

6,060,000 

17,400,000 

800, 000 

100,000 


$9, 086. 81 




WTiitefish 














1905 


Land-locked salmon 




















Steelhead trout. 












774,000 
380,000 




8, 068. 64 




Whiteflsh .. . . 








Pike perch 






1906 












Steelhead trout . 




53,000 








80,666 


■ 8, 530. 62- 




Whiteflsh 








Pike perch 








1907 






122,000 

9,300 

3,388,000 






Steelhead trout. 








Lake trout 




!■ 9, 165. 66 




Whiteflsh 








Pike percli . 








1908 * 


Brook trout 




878,600 

49,000 

3,150,000 














Lake trout 


445,000 


5,380,000 
19,900,000 
9,070,000 


9, 373. 06 




Whiteflsh 






Pike perch . . . 








1909 


Brook trout 




262,800 

45,500 

1,852,000 


















50,000 


7,760,000 
19,800,000 
16,500,000 


[ '10,197.37 




Whiteflsh 














1910S. 


Brook trout 




370,000 

11,400 

4, 246, 500 






Land-locked salmon 












5,425,000 


8,825,000 
13,800,000 






Pike perch 















Output and cost of operating for the period of 10 fiscal years ending June 30, 1910. 
CAPE VINCENT (N. Y.) STATION. 



Fiscal year. 


Output 

benefiting 

primarily 

international 

waters. 


Transfers of 

eggs to other 

stations of 

the bureau. 


Cost. 


1901 


56,881,200 
68,572,909 
36,974,570 
20,619,800 
33,181,040 
37,120,000 
49,906,490 
60,007,170 
40,163,500 
32,462,761 




$11,179.67 


1902 




9, 788. 64 


1903 




7,864.51 
8,274.31 


1904 




1905 




9,533.54 


1906 




8,013.48 


1907 




7,696.47 


1908 




9, 144. 50 


1909 




9,366.01 


1910 




8,344.05 






Total 


435,889,440 




89,205.18 







12,793,250 lake trout eggs transferred to other stations of the bureau. 
'2,306,880 lake trout eggs transferred to other stations of the bureau. 
» 5, 100,000 lake trout eggs transferred to other stations of the bureau. 



INTEBNATIONAL. FISHERIES COMMISSION. 
Output andcostof operating for the -period of 10 fiscal years ending June SO, 1910- 

PUT IN BAY (OHIO) STATION. 



15 

-Cont'd. 



Fiscal year. 



1901 

1902 

1903 

1904 

1905 

1906 

1907 

1908 

1909 

1910 

Total 



Output 

benefiting 

primarily 

international 

waters. 



Transfers of 

eggs to other 

stations of 

the bureau. 



385, 
459, 
286, 
344, 
545, 
463, 
637, 
364, 
778, 
637, 



361,000 
760,000 
493,600 
989,000 
256,000 
429,000 
839, 000 
378, 500 
063, 000 
678,000 



5,103,247,100 



30,000,000 
23,000,000 
40,920,000 
32,407,000 
65,250,000 
72,000,000 
88, 176, 000 
62,940,000 



414,693,000 



Cost. 



$13,363.99 
15,529.83 
12,633.07 
10, 798. 15 
11,903.00 
9,942.79 
11,675.41 
13,526.35 
14,318.46 
11,395.31 



125,086.36 



NORTHVILLE (MICH.) AND AUXILIARY STATIONS. 



1901 . . ."" 


172,581,250 
288,822,000 
181,439,000 
146,734,582 
207,766,699 
203,830,416 
236,832,431 
266,100,437 
232,973,603 
155,769,200 


20,067,000 
52,472,000 
69,600,000 
26,985,000 
37,930,000 
33,624,000 
65,898,000 
66,150,000 
106,910,000 
25,800,000 


$16,767.76 


1902. 


20,083.53 


1903 


20,521.53 


1904 . 


19,768.87 


1905 


21,196.38 


1906 /. 


20,451.41 


1907 


21,413.62 


1908 


21,077.41 


1909 


22,636.16 


1910 


20,657.81 






Total 


2,092,849,618 


505,336,000 


204,576.48 







DULUTH (MINN.) STATION. 



1901 


21, 681, 755 
39, 100, 130 
30,364,209 
21,143,400 
39,419,903 
32,349,200 
27,847,300 
38,366,600 
45,670,300 
32, 677, 900 


700,000 
6,121,000 
9,386,320 
2,793,250 


$7,896.62 


1902 


8, 355. 75 


1903 •- 


8, 063. 34 


1904 


9,086.81 


1905 


8, 068. 64 


1906 




8, 530. 42 


1907 




9, 165. 66 


1908 


2,306,880 


9,373.06 


1909 


10, 197. 37 


1910 


5, 100, 000 


9,893.22 






Total 


328,620,697 


26,407,450 


88, 030. 89 







GRAND SUMMARY. 



Annual output and cost of operating the bureau's four stations and auxiliaries from which 
the output is principally deposited in international waters for a period of 10 fiscal years 
ending June SO, 1910. 



Fiscal year. 


Output bene- 
fiting prima- 
rily interna- 
tional waters. 


Transfers of 

eggs to other 

stations of the 

bureau. 


Cost. 


1901 


636,505,205 
856,255,039 
535,271,379 
533, 486, 782 
825,623,642 
736,728,616 
952, 425, 221 
928,852,707 
1, 096, 870, 403 
858,587,861 


20,767,000 
58,593,000 
108,886,320 
52,778,250 
78,850,000 
66,031,000 
131,148,000 
140, 456, 880 
195,086,000 
93,840,000 


$49,208.04 
53,757 75 


1902 . . 


1903 


49,082.45 
47, 928. 14 
50,701.56 
46, 938. 10 


1904 


1905 


1906 


1907 


49, 951. 16 


1908 


53,121.32 


.1909 


56, 520. 00 


1910 


49,690.39 




Total 


7, 960, 606, 855 


946,436,450 


506,898.91 





16 lx tern ati onal fisheries commission. 

Appendix B. 

Resolutions Passed by American Fisheries Society and American Fish and 
Game Protective Association, and Views of Various Fishing Firms Regard- 
ing Federal Control of International Waters. 

(1) American Fisheries Society {1906). — The American Fisheries Society, at its annual 
meeting held at Grand Rapids, Mich., in 1906, adopted by unanimous vote the follow- 
ing resolutions : 

"Whereas the members of the American Fisheries Society now assembled at Grand 
Rapids, Mich., view with alarm the threatened depletion of whitefish, lake trout, and 
other fishes in the waters and boundary rivers of the Great Lakes; and 

"Whereas Ontario, to the north of us, advocates 'stopping fishing for five years,' 
and we do not believe such action will produce the desired results, but, on the contrary, 
we believe that lack of uniform laws between Canada and the several States bordering 
on the Great Lakes, and the lack of concurrent jurisdiction for boundary streams, 
without enforcement of existing laws, poor protection given during spawning season, 
and a total disregard of the size of fish caught by fishermen, are at the root of the evil: 
Therefore 

'■'Resolved, That it is the sense of this meeting that Canada and the United States 
ought to enter into a treaty looking to the control of the fish in our Great Lakes, not 
only the stocking but the protection. 

''Resolved further, That there should be Federal control of boundary streams, and 
that the States concerned should cede their rights to the National Government. 

" Resolved further , That we heartily commend the efforts that have been made by 
Hon. George Shiras, of the third congressional district of Pennsylvania, looking to 
Federal control, and that we heartily pledge him our undivided support. 

"Resolved further, That a copy of this resolution be furnished to each of our Senators 
and Representatives at Washington, also to each member of the Dominion's House of 
Parliament." 

(2) American Fisheries Society (1907). — The next year (1907), at the annual meeting 
held at Erie, Pa., the following resolutions were unanimously adopted: 

"Resolved, That this society reaffirm its resolution adopted at its meeting at Grand 
Rapids, Mich,, last year, in support of the Shiras bill giving Federal control of .bound- 
ary waters." 

(3) American Fisheries Society (1908). — At its meeting held in Washington in 1908 
the society unanimously adopted the following resolutions: 

"Resolved, That the conclusion of a convention between the United States and 
Great Britain, by which the regulations of the fisheries of the contiguous waters of the 
United States and Canada will be assumed by the two Federal Governments, marks 
a distinct epoch in the history of American fisheries; and we pledge our official and 
personal efforts to facilitate the work of the International Fisheries Commission ap- 
pointed under this convention." 

(4) Jnternalional Fisheries Congress, 1908. — The United States delegates to the 
Fourth International Fisheries Congress, held in Washington in 1908, expressed them- 
selves on the question of Federal control as follows: 

"The convention between Great Britain and the United States under which the 
regulation and administration of the fisheries of the boundary waters of the United 
States and Canada will be undertaken by the respective Federal Governments marks 
an epoch in the history of our fisheries. We pledge our support to all measures that, 
after proper investigation, are found to be necessary for the preservation of the fish- 
eries of the waters in question." 

(5) North American Fish and Game Protective Association. — ^The North American 
Fish and Game Protective Association, meeting at Albany, N. Y., in February, 1907, 
unanimously passed a similar resolution, strongly advocating Federal control of the 
fisheries in international waters. 

(6) Ohio Fish Commission. — It is desirable that this department have some knowl- 
edge of the laws which will regulate fishing in Lake Erie, under the (international) 
arrangement, in order that any local legislation contemplated may conform to the 
national code. 

At this season of the year the commercial fishermen are making up their nets for 
next year, and it is important that they be advised as to the devices which may be 
used and the size of the mesh authorized. 

At a meeting of the commissioners on Tuesday evening I was directed to communi- 
cate with you on this subject and to request that, if possible, you supply us with 
information regarding changes which will affect the fishing interests of this State. 



INTEBNATIONAIi FISHERIES COMMISSION. 



17 



(John 0. Speaks, chief warden, Ohio Fish and Game Commission, to United States 
Fish Commissioner Bowers, December 17, 1909.) 

(7) Minnesota Fish Commission.— I am a great believer m Federal control of our 
international waters, not only for the propagation of the fish therein, but for the 
protection of the same, as I believe propagation and protection must go hand in hand 
if we accomplish the results we ought to. (Hon. Sam F. Fullerton, superintendent 
fisheries, St. Paul, Minn.) 

(8) Mr. August J. Anderson.— 1 trust that the proposed regulations may soon 
become law, so that we can have time to prepare for next season's fishing. As the 
matter now stands it is not safe for us to order any netting, for fear next season the 
nets may not be lawful. I sincerely hope something can be done to protect our fishing 
industry. I believe in protecting our food fish. The fishermen have everything to 
gain. (August J. Anderson, fisherman, Marquette, Mich.) 

(9) Keystone Fishery Co. — The regulations, as a whole, will prove immensely bene- 
ficial to the fishing industry, and we for our part would deprecate failure to enact a 
law which would make the same effective. (Keystone Fish Co., Erie, Pa.) 



Appendix C. 

Statement showing the prepared weight of salmon caught and marketed from the Puget 
Sound {Wash.) and Fraser River (British Columbia) districts, years 1899 to 1909. 





Puget Sound. 


Fraser River. 


1899 . 


Pounds. 

62,089,500 

32,595,600 


Pounds. 
29,624,508 


] 900 .'. 


22,960,828 
57,716,231 


1901. . . 


1902 


48,719,632 
43,467,424 
44,875,056 
63,894,768 
36,768,896 
45,507,840 
31,790,720 
83,649,264 


26,353,742 


1903 . ... 


18,939,626 
20,397,529 


1904 


1905 


40,655,904 


1906. 


23,329,152 
18,849,568 


1907 


1908. 


9,7.50,582 


1909 


36,245,824 







Note. — The above represents the weight of the products as prepared for market. A considerable quan- 
tity of the Puget Sound salmon shown above would never have gone up the Fraser River, but there has 
been no way of separating this from the Fraser River run. About 80 per cent of the Puget Sound catch 
may be regarded as Fraser River fish. 



Appendix D. 

Personnel for enforcement of State fishery laws and regulations in international ivaters 
between the United States and Canada. 



MAINE. 

6 wardens, at $600 $3,600.00 

6 boats and help, at $450 2, 700. 00 

Subsistence ' 300' 00 

6, 600. 00 

VERMONT. 

Number of wardens in State. • ].5g 

Number concerned with Lakes Champlain and Memphremagog (inter- 
national waters), estimated. 3q 

Approximate annual expense |15 Qyj qq 

Chargeable to international waters 5' qoo." 00 

H. Doc. 1375, 61-3 2 



18 



INTERNATIONAL FISHERIES COMMISSION. 



NEW YORK. 



For salaries of chief protector, 4 assistant chiefs, and 70 protectors . . . $59, 075. 75 

Expenses of same 39, 445. 10 

Witness, court, attorney fees, and costs in prosecution and surve3dng 18, 281. 75 

Maintenance and repairs, State launches 265. 64 

Printing and distribution of game laws 3, 376. 65 

Printing and distribution of hunters' licenses 2, 358. 56 

122, 803. 45 

Miscellaneous expenses, salaries of commissioners, clerical force, printing, 

etc 32, 152. 09 

Of this $32,152.09, based on a reasonable proportion, one-fifth of the 
$32,152.09 would be for protection, or 6, 400. 00 

122, 803. 44 
6, 400. 00 

Total expense for enforcing fish and game laws 129, 203. 44 

Of this amount it is estimated that at least one-sixth should be charged 
to protection of the fisheries in international waters 21, 533. 91 

PENNSYLVANIA. 

One steam tug, 70 feet long, the Commodore Perry, cost 6, 000. 00 

Annual cost of maintenance (regarded as insufficient) 3, 000. 00 

Cost of additional wardens 1, 400. 00 

Total annual cost 4, 400. 00 

OHIO. 

Chief warden 1 

Special warden 1 

Deputy wardens 12 

1 steam tug, Oliver H. Perry, cost $10, 109. 00 

4 gasoline launches, cost, about 500. 00 

10, 609. 00 
Maintenance: 

Salaries 9, 580. 00 

Expenses 8,000.00 

17, 580. 00 

Output of State hatcheries (whitefish, herring, pike, and pickerel): 

1901 50, 000. 000 

1902 40, 000, 000 

1904 30, 000, 000 

1905 35,000,000 

1906 25, 000, 000 

1907 100,000,000 

Present capacity of Put in Bay hatchery, 428,544,000 herring fry. 

MICHIGAN. 

Salaries, about $15, 000. 00 

Expenses, about 33, 075. 00 

48, 075^ 00 
Chargeable to international waters, at least 25, 000. 00 



INTERNATIONAL FISHEEIES COMMISSION. 



19 



WISCONSIN, 



Annual expenses, about |30, 000. 00 

Chargeableto international waters, about 20, 000. 00 

Output of hatcheries. 





Whiteflsh. 


Lake trout. 


Wall-eyed 
pike. 


1901 


35,450,000 
66,820,000 
37,500,000 
20,375,000 
15,278,000 
53,780,000 
27,025,000 
12,210,000 


19,980,000 
17,877,000 
16,168,000 
20,462,000 
18,803,000 
16,107,000 
19,724,000 
12,345,000 


78,200,000 


1902 


37, 325, 000 


1903 


46,170,000 
37,825,000 
76,800,000 
79,140,000 
44,900,000 
112,075,000 


1904 


1905 


1906 


1907 


1908 





MINNESOTA. 

Annual appropriation for 1909 135^ 000. 00 

Receipts from licenses, fines, and all other sources 60^ 257. 68 

Total expense of hatcheries, wardens, salaries, etc 86' 972. 92 

Chargeable to international waters, at least 20J 000. 00 

WASHINGTON. 

Salaries 5^ lOO. 00 

Expenses 4^ 090, 00 



9, 190. 00 



o 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

IIIJIIIIIIIIJI! 



002 877 580 5 



